Wednesday, 10 August 2011

The Stonehenge Enigma - An inconvenient truth

By Robert John Langdon

In 1935 a car park was created to the north of the A344 road from Amesbury to Devizes, some 100m north-west of Stonehenge, so that visitors’ cars would not hinder traffic. Although the area stripped of turf and soil was examined by W.E.V. Young, an experienced excavator who worked with Alexander Keiller at Avebury, no features were found.  The car park was later doubled in size but as the experts assumed that no activity would be in that area, there was no record of archaeological work undertaken.


Car Park post holes marked like white mini roundabouts


Q. Why did Young not notice four, one metre post holes - not exactly small are they?


Q. If four massive features were 'missed' what other features were 'overlooked' or destroyed?


Q. If W.E.V. Young was a 'poor' archaeologist, why did he become the curator of the Avebury Museum? 


However, in 1966 when it was again extended (so that it was by this time four times the size of the original), a series of circular features cut into the chalk bedrock, and set roughly in line, were observed. Excavation was undertaken by Faith Vatcher, at that time the much-respected curator of the Avebury Museum, with her husband Major Lance Vatcher.






They discovered that three of the features were substantial post-holes cut into the ground, while a fourth was the place where a tree had once stood. Whereas tree-throws are commonly found on the chalk of this area, these pits were more unusual. There is no record of whether the area where the new visitor facilities were to be placed was investigated by the Vatchers. However, when these facilities were also enlarged in 1988, a fourth post hole was discovered.


Ronald Hutton (in 'Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles' 1991) mentions that neither Stonehenge nor Mesolithic experts took much interest in the discovery.. maybe because it didn't fit into their ideas of how things had been in the area.


This is probably why after taken samples of the Post holes the samples were sealed up and sent into an achieve without being carbon dated to verify the Late Neolithic date they suggested in the report.


Q. Why did Vatchers not send away the samples for carbon dating?


Q. If the forth pit was a tree holes and this area was a forest, where are the others in the car park?


Q. If they found three pits in a row, why did they not follow the line and find the post hole found in 1988?


These were skilled archaeologists that went on to further their career excavating other sites, writing books and lecturing.  The mystery of the post-holes would have remained hidden away if it was not for the enquiring mind of a graduate Susan Limbrey, who realised that Pine wood would not be growing in the Boreal Period of Stonehenge - at that point in 1975 that 2 of the three carbon samples were carbon dated.


Pit A    HAR-455 9130+/-180 BP    corrected to   8820BC to 7730BC
Pit B    HAR-456 8090+/-140 BP    corrected to   7480BC to 6590BC



Q. When they found the wood was Pine, why did they not know that Pine only grew in this area in the Mesolithic?


Q. Why was only 2 of the 3 samples carbon dated?


Q. Once the date was verified why was the car park not closed and dug up to see what else was missed?


Thirteen Years later a fourth post hole was discovered by Martin Trott, a young graduate of Southampton University who at the time was working for Wessex Archaeology (later he joined the Inland Revenue.)
The four pits were all roughly circular, 1.3m to 1.9m in diameter, and 1.3m to 1.5m deep, and appear once to have held substantial posts c.0.75m in diameter. Unlike the Vatcher’s pits, Trott’s was found to have been re-cut at a much later stage and subsequently deliberately back filled. 


Q. Did the other three pits have this detail and was not accurately report?


Only a few undiagnostic flint flakes and other remains were incorporated into the fill of the pits. However, charcoal from the fills was found to be solely from pine trees. More surprisingly, radiocarbon dates obtained from this charcoal suggest that the pits had been dug between 8090BC to 7090BC.


Post Hole 9580  QxA-4220 8400+/- 100 BP  corrected to 7580-7090BC
                          QxA-4219 8520+/- 80 BP    corrected to 7700-7420BC
                          GU-5109   8880+/- 80 BP    corrected to 8090-7690BC


Q. As this find would verify the astonishing finds of the 1960's why was a junior member of the archaeology community responsible for the excavation?


Q. This post hole was used for over 400 years, so were is the evidence of settlements (houses) in this area?


Q. To cut down a tree then dig a hole then stand the post upright using stone tools would have taken weeks - where are the camp fires and stone tool flints from sharpening the axes?


According to the book - Stonehenge in its landscape; Snail shells and pollen grains preserved in the fill suggest that the pits were cut in woodland. Taken together, the disposition of soil layers within the pits, the pine charcoal, radiocarbon dates and snail shells provide sound evidence that during the Early Mesolithic a group of people erected stout pine posts in the middle of a mature pine and hazel (Boreal) woodland.... "They are likely to be individual uprights, perhaps reminiscent of those American Indian (totem poles)"(Cleal et al 1995, 43-56).


Although Mesolithic sites normally produce evidence for light structures, such as shelters, huts or hearths, the lack of these features in the Stonehenge Car Park is without parallel.


'Totem Pole' sitting in Stonehenge's 'dry' river valley


Q. American Indian 'totem poles' are placed on a plain so they can be seen from a distance - why were buried in a forest?


Q. Why place the 'totem poles' in a valley when there is high ground just 50 metres away?


And if we use the average date for the construction of these post holes the frequency and alignment just makes the current explanation of these features a complete nonsense.  The 'experts' would have you believe that:  Post A would be planted in about 8275BC - then some 385 years later they planted WA 9580 (75 metres away), returning 855 years later Post B is then planted next to Post A in an alignment with Post C (who's date may never be known), leaving no trace of occupancy as this is a traditional hunter-gather ceremonial meeting spot.


Q.  Pine is a softwood and would rot in less than 25 years, how did they know where to plant the second, third and forth post?


Q. If they kept coming back year after year to the same spot, why is there no evidence in the car park unlike other sites?


Q. As the post had rotted, why cut a new hole, why not use the old hole?


The 'experts' would have you believe that the same type of hunter-gathers returned to the same spot some 4,000 years later (as the post holes are not dated beyond 7000BC) by complete chance (as all the totem poles had rotted away) to build the first phase of Stonehenge!!


Clearly this version of events just does not stand up to scrutiny.  The history of the site including the original  discovery shows that an attempt has been made to 'brush the evidence under the carpet' or to dismiss the findings as superficial to the story of Stonehenge, as any other conclusion will embarrass the 'experts' and English Heritable that has spend so much time and money convincing the public that they known exactly what happened in prehistoric times at Stonehenge.


AND NOW FOR SOME ANSWERS!


The Stonehenge Enigma, shows that these structures played a more significant role than has previously been believed.  Not only does it reveal what these post holes were for, but it also goes on the give a more plausable explanation on what really happened at Stonehenge in the past - an inconvenient truth for both the archaeological establishment and anthropologists, for if the truth was admitted they would have to accept that Stonehenge is 5,000 years older than they have told you, and the history of how our civilisation developed, would need to be completely re-written.


Stonehenge's Car Park showing the shoreline of the River Avon during the Mesolithic Period.
The post holes that were found in 1966 where mooring posts for the boats that brought the stones to Stonehenge.
From Robert Langdon's book - The Stonehenge Enigma.
FAQ's


Q. So what are the post holes found in the Stonehenge Car Park?


A.  These are mooring posts for Mesolithic ships and boats - after the great ice age melt rivers and streams were overflowing with water from the two miles of ice that had been sitting on Britain.  This water soaked into the land and raised the ground water table.  Rivers like the Avon as illustrated above were 30m higher than today.


Mooring post with lintel


Q. How long did this flooding last?


A.  Thousands of years until the Neolithic period - We can see from geographical data on sea levels that the water flowed into the sea only in relatively small but constant rate for the next 10,000 years.  The big inundation from the ice age melt did not happen.  This can be seen with Doggerland that was an island in the North Sea prior to the ice age, this area did not flood until 5000BC - 7,000 years after the ice caps had melted.


Q.  So how do you explain the gap between the post hole dates in the Car Park?


A.  These mooring posts would have worn out over time and need to be replaced.  I suspect if English Heritage surveyed the Car Park correctly in 1966 they would find post holes all the way (75m) to the single post hole they found in 1988. Moreover, this was the way our ancestors brought the stones to Stonehenge, as in Mesolithic times it was a peninsula surround on three sides by water. This mooring point would have lasted over 2000 years.


Bringing stones to Stonehenge




Q.  So why does this make Stonehenge 5000 years earlier?


A. If the 'experts' are right, these hunter-gatherers needed to return every year to the same spot.  When people camp they make fires, this area should have over 1500 Mesolithic Camp fires - but it doesn't even have one!  So they either camped on Stonehenge or the nearest camp Woodhenge.  Consequently, this would change history, as Woodhenge and Stonehenge is dated as 3000BC not 8000BC and therefore the sequence of development as seen in history books would be completely wrong!  Moreover, the only dating evidence for Stonehenge is antler picks in the ditch (stone can't be dated) so if they admitted that hunter-gatherers camped at Stonehenge, there opens a distinct possibility that the ditch dates are wrong as the better carbon dating evidence is available from the Car Park Post Holes.


Q. What makes you believe that Stonehenge was built at the same time as the mooring posts?


A. The size of these holes and the reason they dug a flat pit then packed it with infill against the posts.  The only reason you dig a pit with a flat bottom is to stop the pole sinking into the ground over time, due to its weight.  And the only reason you do this is when it had something on top of it that carries weight.  Below is an illustration of the mooring posts and a cross beam holding a stone - Moreover, you can use this construction like a crane as the tides will lift the stone from the boats by tying them up at high tide and then waiting for the tide to drop.  The boat can then be removed and the stone lowered to the ground on a sledge or rollers.


Mooring post with horizontal tree truck added - securing a Bluestone  from Wales
Q. Although the posts maybe Mesolithic, what makes you think that Stonehenge was constructed then?


A.  In the post hole found in 1988 they found something very interesting a piece of Rhyolite.  And that's now really interesting until you realise that Rhyolite is the technical name for Bluestone!!  and it was wedged in between two soil samples dated 7560BC to 7335BC.  This is the best scientific evidence for the building of Stonehenge Phase I - after the ditches/moats were constructed.  Of course you could believe it got there by accident (all the way from Wales during the ice age) but the likelihood is that it is a fragment from the Bluestones being worked prior to erection.


Mooring posts and water surrounding Stonehenge


Q. So what is the fuss about Stonehenge being 5,000 years older than they believe?


A. This would make Stonehenge the oldest monument in the world and therefore its builders become the beginning of western European civilisation - this goes against all current hunter-gatherers theories as they were 'supposedly' civilised by the far eastern travellers and adopting farming prior to building Stonehenge. If a civilisation could build Stonehenge and live off boats, what need is farming and is this a reason it was not adopted until the waters finally fell in the Neolithic Period? - This not only changes our history but the history of the world.



Extracts and pictures from the book can be found at: www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk




RJL
(by Robert John Langdon)

Tuesday, 2 August 2011

Oldest open-aired cemetery found in Somerset

By Robert John Langdon

This article appeared recently:



"Somerset was the site of the UK's oldest open-air cemetery, the county council says.
Recent radiocarbon dating of two skulls found at a sand quarry in Greylake nature reserve near Middlezoy in 1928 revealed them to be 10,000 years old.
The council said the find was made under its Lost Islands of Somerset project by a team investigating the archaeology of the Somerset Levels.
Since their discovery, the skulls have been held at Bridgwater's Blake Museum.
The new findings show that by around 8,300 BC, hunter-gatherers were burying their dead on what was once an island amid the Levels.
All the other human remains from this early period in Britain have been found in caves such as Aveline's Hole in Somerset which is the largest Mesolithic burial ground in the UK.
Somerset County Councillor Christine Lawrence, cabinet member for community services said: "Somerset's wonderfully rich heritage plays a big part in attracting visitors. I'm delighted that this project has thrown new light on to these exciting finds."
"Amazing news"
"This was amazing news and was just the result we were hoping for," added Dr Richard Brunning, from Somerset County Council's Heritage Service who is leading the Lost Islands of Somerset Project.
"It shows that a Mesolithic hunter-gatherer group was operating from the island and burying its dead there.
"Such open-air cemeteries are extremely rare in Europe and this is the only one known from the UK."
Flint tools were also found in large numbers on the site in the 1950s suggesting that it was used as a long-term camp site.
The Lost Islands of Somerset Project team will carry out more analysis on the skulls and tools to ascertain how this ancient community lived and died".

Quite interesting until you read between the lines and then some disturbing questions arise:


  • These skulls were discovered in 1922 - why is it taken 80 years to realise that the find was important?
  • The good doctor claims that they were a burial - so did they find the rest of the skeleton and if so what position were they buried in?
  • What ages were the skulls - are we looking at a family or ancestors over a period of time?
  • Lost islands of Somerset - nice idea, have they been reading my book?
So what can we truly assume from this evidence?

Well looking at the online archive I can tell you that only the skulls only were found so burial is unlikely and as the original discoverer believed them to be victims of the Sedgmoor battle burials of the 16th century - we can now see why it took 80 years for someone to carbon date the skulls.

As you see when archaeologist get it wrong - they do it big time!

The doctor talks of the skulls being buried on Somerset islands unfortunately I have found the exact site the skulls were found and the profile shows that the quarry is not on an island - nice try!!


What they have found is a boat accident in 8300BC, as you can see they would be islands close to the site and no doubt they were either sailing to or form Glastonbury via Priest Hill which contains a Long Barrow at Collard Hill would you believe!!

Sorry to say just another case of when academics just get it wrong due to them trying to tow the accepted path of scientific nonsense rather than looking at the facts and coming to their own conclusions.  At least it will give my second edition extra material.

This is not the first time that the 'experts' have got it all wrong - the Visitors Car Park Post Holes that we have been discussion recently were found in 1966 and classified as late Neolithic (the same date as Stonehenge), it was only an eagle eyed student (without a PhD or MSc) to realise that the wood found 'pine' did not exist in the late Neolithic Period - it was only then that the sample were sent for carbon testing. Where it would still be sitting now and my hypothesis would have no real evidence.

How many other samples have yet to be discovered??

This is why I question all  academic research, not because they don't understand but they want to keep their jobs and be employed in the future as they have mortgages to pay and children to feed, so they will reflect the 'accepted dates and theories'.

This is institutional self regulation - we see it with the financial services and with the media. It is neither the truth or full disclosure.

RJL

(by Robert John Langdon)